Balanced Neighbor Selection for BitTorrent-Like Networks

  • Sándor Laki
  • Tamás Lukovszki
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8125)


In this paper we propose a new way of constructing the evolving graph in BitTorrent (BT) as new peers join the system one by one. The maximum degree in the constructed graph will be O(1) while the diameter will remain O(ln n), with high probability, where n is the number of nodes. Considering a randomized upload policy, we prove that the distribution of b blocks on the overlay generated by our neighbor selection strategy takes O(b + ln n) phases only, with high probability, which is optimal up to a constant factor. It improves the previous upper bound of O(b + (ln n)2) by Arthur and Panigrahy (SODA’06). Besides theoretical analysis, thorough simulations have been done to validate our algorithm and demonstrate its applicability in the BT network.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Arthur, D., Panigrahy, R.: Analyzing bittorrent and related peer-to-peer networks. In: Proc. of the Seventeenth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pp. 961–969. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Azar, Y., Broder, A.Z., Karlin, A.R., Upfal, E.: Balanced allocations. SIAM J. Comput. 29(1), 180–200 (1999)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bharambe, A.R., Herley, C., Padmanabhan, V.N.: Understanding and Deconstructing BitTorrent Performance. Technical Report MSR-TR-2005-03, Microsoft Research (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bharambe, A.R., Herley, C., Padmanabhan, V.N.: Analyzing and improving a bittorrent networks performance mechanisms. In: Proceedings of the 25th IEEE Int. Conference on Computer Communications, INFOCOM 2006, pp. 1–12 (April 2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bindal, R., Cao, P., Chan, W., Medved, J., Suwala, G., Bates, T., Zhang, A.: Improving traffic locality in bittorrent via biased neighbor selection. In: ICDCS 2006, p. 1 (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hecht, F.V., Bocek, T., Stiller, B.: B-tracker: Improving load balancing and efficiency in distributed p2p trackers. In: 2011 IEEE Int. Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing, P2P, pp. 310–313 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Izal, M., Urvoy-Keller, G., Biersack, E.W., Felber, P., Al Hamra, A., Garcés-Erice, L.: Dissecting bittorrent: Five months in a torrent’s lifetime. In: Barakat, C., Pratt, I. (eds.) PAM 2004. LNCS, vol. 3015, pp. 1–11. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Motwani, R., Raghavan, P.: Randomized algorithms. ACM Comput. Surv. 28(1), 33–37 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Naor, M., Wieder, U.: Novel architectures for p2p applications: The continuous-discrete approach. ACM Transactions on Algorithms 3(3) (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Picone, M., Amoretti, M., Zanichelli, F.: An evaluation criterion for adaptive neighbor selection in heterogeneous peer-to-peer networks. In: Pfeifer, T., Bellavista, P. (eds.) MMNS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5842, pp. 144–156. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pouwelse, J., Garbacki, P., Epema, D., Sips, H., Epema, D.H.J., Sips, H.J.: A measurement study of the bittorrent peer-to-peer file-sharing system (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang, H., Liu, J., Chen, B., Xu, K., Ma, Z.: On tracker selection for peer-to-peer traffic locality. In: 2010 IEEE Tenth Int. Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing, P2P, pp. 1–10 (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang, H., Shao, Z., Chen, M., Ramchandran, K.: Optimal neighbor selection in bittorrent-like peer-to-peer networks. In: Proc. ACM SIGMETRICS Joint Int. Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems, pp. 141–142 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sándor Laki
    • 1
  • Tamás Lukovszki
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of InformaticsEötvös Loránd UniversityBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations